Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Provide a ceiling value for WorkerCount setting #246

Closed
odinserj opened this issue Nov 14, 2014 · 4 comments
Closed

Provide a ceiling value for WorkerCount setting #246

odinserj opened this issue Nov 14, 2014 · 4 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@odinserj
Copy link
Member

Every worker owns a connection to a storage. Currently WorkerCount value in BackgroundJobServerOptions is being calculated as a ProcessorCount * 5 value. In usual cases this value is ok as a default, but consider you have a 20-core server. In this case there will be 100 workers, and it is fine. However, since each worker use a connection, this value can produce errors:

To make things more predictable, the default value should have a maximum at, for example, 40 to produce enough workers and leave some connections for other components.

@odinserj odinserj added this to the 1.2.0 milestone Nov 14, 2014
@odinserj odinserj self-assigned this Nov 14, 2014
@VoidMonk
Copy link

Hi @odinserj, seems like BackgroundJobServerOptions still allows only a maximum of 20 workers. Is it still required to be max 20, or can it be increased/overridden somehow?

@acmediainc
Copy link

Hi @odinserj, seems like BackgroundJobServerOptions still allows only a maximum of 20 workers. Is it still required to be max 20, or can it be increased/overridden somehow?

Hi, thoughts on this? Is it still maxed to 20?

@odinserj
Copy link
Member Author

odinserj commented Aug 9, 2019

It's a limit only for the default value. You can set as many workers as you want.

@acmediainc
Copy link

Thank you very much, love the product btw...built some really cool stuff with it :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants